Skip to main content
Federal & State Lawfederalstatelaw.com
Home/Federal/Cases
Supreme Court· 5/29/2025

Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County

Citations

  • 605 U.S. 168

Oral argument

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • finding the Board’s lack of regulatory authority over separate oil projects an important reason as to why it did not have to analyze those separate effects
  • “[W]hen determining whether an agency’s EIS complied with NEPA, a court should afford substantial deference to the agency.”
  • “The bedrock principle of judicial review in NEPA cases can be stated in a word: Deference.”
  • “As this Court has said, the term ‘alternatives’ is not self-defining, and ‘[c]ommon sense’ should be brought to bear.” (quotation omitted)
  • “Because an EIS is only one input into an agency’s decision and does not itself require any particular substantive outcome, the adequacy of an EIS is relevant only to the question of whether an agency’s final decision . . . was reasonably explained.”
  • “Even if an EIS falls short in some respects, that deficiency may not necessarily require a court to vacate the agency’s ultimate approval of a project, at least absent reason to believe that the agency might disapprove the project if it added more to the EIS.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Brett Kavanaugh

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.